Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P entered into an agreement with D for the construction and installation of new, custom-designed jewelry cabinets, cases, and fixtures for P's retail jewelry store. The items were to be built in accordance with plans and specifications drawn by a California-based designer specializing in jewelry stores who had been retained to design the renovation of P's store. After paying over $32,000 on the contract, P wrote to D in May 1986 complaining of the workmanship and of the fact that solid cherry hardwood cases were 'ordered and paid for,' but 'we received [only] veneered particle board.' D's president responded by denying that there were any defects and suggested that the unpaid balance was sufficient to cover any unsatisfactory items. P sued for breach of contract, breach of warranty and fraud. D counterclaimed for $3,000, representing the alleged unpaid balance on the contract. The jury found in P's favor, awarding $40,000 in damages and rejecting D's counterclaim. D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.